6 Comments
User's avatar
Taimoor Chatoor's avatar

Your newsletter is always awesome, Professor. I’m really grateful that you do this.

Expand full comment
Lokesh Kumar's avatar

Given that southwest operates on the same underlying airport infrastructure, it would have perhaps been very difficult / impossible to optimize the processes beyond a point. However, I wonder if SW could have introduced something very different - like $1 per pound fee or something like that, which would be very different than industry. Is that completely stupid idea?

Expand full comment
Gad Allon's avatar

I think it will make things more complex and more uncertain to most of its passengers.

Expand full comment
Lokesh Kumar's avatar

But there will be passengers that might actually want to reduce the stuff that they carry, if it was per pound. However, that might reduce the fee SW generates.

Expand full comment
James N.'s avatar

On many routes, Southwest hasn't had the lowest fares for years now (at least anecdotally), so I think their brand has been hemorrhaging for a while. In addition, Southwest's growth has been constrained by running out of markets in North America to which to fly. Their reliance on a single aircraft type has made it difficult to serve smaller markets with frequency as well. I think earning revenue on bags will help financially, but they need to re-brand themselves positively and live up to that rebranding in their operations and customer service.

Expand full comment
Gad Allon's avatar

I agree. But their customers were ok with higher prices, as long as they were transparent and simple (while not very high).

Expand full comment